Sri Aurobindo
Letters on Poetry and Art
SABCL - Volume 27
Part 1. Poetry and its Creation
Section 2. The Poetry of the Spirit
Psychic, Mystic and Spiritual Poetry
Symbolic Poetry and Mystic Poetry
I suppose the poem you sent me might be described as 
the poetic rendering of a symbolic vision — it is not a mystic poem. A poem can 
no doubt be symbolic and mystic at the same time. For instance Nishikanta’s 
English poem of the vision of the Lion-flame and the Deer-flame, beauty and 
power, was symbolic and mystic at once. It is when the thing seen is spiritually 
lived and has an independent vivid reality of its own which exceeds any 
conceptual significance it may have on the surface that it is mystic. Symbols 
may be of various kinds; there are those that are concealing images capable of 
intellectual interpretation but still different from either symbolic or 
allegorical figures — and there are those that have a more intimate life of 
their own and are not conceptual so much as occultly vital in their 
significance; there 

 are still others that need a 
psychic or spiritual or at least an inner and intuitive insight to identify 
oneself fully with their meaning. In a poem which uses conceptual symbols the 
mind is more active and the reader wants to know what it means to the mind; but 
as minds differ, the poet may attach one meaning to it and the reader may find 
another, if the image used is at all an enigmatic one, not mentally clear and 
precise. In the more deeply symbolist — still more in the mystic — poem the mind 
is submerged in the vividness of the reality and any mental explanation falls 
far short of what is felt and lived in the deeper vital or psychic response. 
This is what Housman in his book tries to explain with regard to Blake’s poetry, 
though he seems to me to miss altogether the real nature of the response. It is 
not the mere sensation to which what he calls pure poetry appeals but to a 
deeper inner life or life-soul within us which has profounder depths than the 
thinking mind and responds with a certain kind of soul-excitement or ecstasy — 
the physical vibrations on which he lays stress are merely a very outward result 
of this sudden stir within the occult folds of the being. Mystic poetry can 
strike still deeper — it can stir the inmost and subtlest recesses of the 
life-soul and the secret inner mind at the same time; it can even, if it is of 
the right kind, go beyond these also to the pure inmost psyche.
are still others that need a 
psychic or spiritual or at least an inner and intuitive insight to identify 
oneself fully with their meaning. In a poem which uses conceptual symbols the 
mind is more active and the reader wants to know what it means to the mind; but 
as minds differ, the poet may attach one meaning to it and the reader may find 
another, if the image used is at all an enigmatic one, not mentally clear and 
precise. In the more deeply symbolist — still more in the mystic — poem the mind 
is submerged in the vividness of the reality and any mental explanation falls 
far short of what is felt and lived in the deeper vital or psychic response. 
This is what Housman in his book tries to explain with regard to Blake’s poetry, 
though he seems to me to miss altogether the real nature of the response. It is 
not the mere sensation to which what he calls pure poetry appeals but to a 
deeper inner life or life-soul within us which has profounder depths than the 
thinking mind and responds with a certain kind of soul-excitement or ecstasy — 
the physical vibrations on which he lays stress are merely a very outward result 
of this sudden stir within the occult folds of the being. Mystic poetry can 
strike still deeper — it can stir the inmost and subtlest recesses of the 
life-soul and the secret inner mind at the same time; it can even, if it is of 
the right kind, go beyond these also to the pure inmost psyche.